From owner-freebsd-isp Fri Jul 18 17:04:40 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id RAA25044 for isp-outgoing; Fri, 18 Jul 1997 17:04:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cedb.dpcsys.com (cedb.DPCSYS.com [209.25.4.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA25031; Fri, 18 Jul 1997 17:04:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (dan@localhost) by cedb.dpcsys.com (8.8.5/8.8.2) with SMTP id AAA01691; Sat, 19 Jul 1997 00:04:28 GMT Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 17:04:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Dan Busarow cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: upgrading to a safe BIND? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-isp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, 18 Jul 1997, Brandon Gillespie wrote: > Why don't we ship FreeBSD with bind-8? From what I've read, it seems like > the better of the two.. The new named.conf syntax. You could ask people at install time if they want their named.boot converted to named.conf and that would work for most people. But a lot of us have scripts that update that file and they need to be re-written to handle the new format. I think we need to wait until 8.x has been in circulation for a while before breaking several years worth of tools. I'd suggest 3.0 as a target for the new version. By the time that is released I would guess that most everyone who has automated DNS tools will have converted on their own. Dan -- Dan Busarow 714 443 4172 DPC Systems / Beach.Net dan@dpcsys.com Dana Point, California 83 09 EF 59 E0 11 89 B4 8D 09 DB FD E1 DD 0C 82